The letter does not ask for a full boycott but rather states: While we believe colleges and universities may want to cooperate in providing data to publications for the purposes of rankings, we believe such data provision should be limited to data which is collected in accord with clear, shared professional standards (not the idiosyncratic standards of any single publication), and to data which is required to be reported to state or federal officials or which the institution believes (in accord with good accountability) should routinely be made available to any member of the public who seeks it.
The letter also asks presidents not to use the rankings as a form of publicity: Among other reasons, we believe … rankings: imply a false precision and authority that is not warranted by the data they use; obscure important differences in educational mission in aligning institutions on a single scale; say nothing or very little about whether students are actually learning at particular colleges or universities; encourage wasteful spending and gamesmanship in institutions' pursuing improved rankings; overlook the importance of a student in making education happen and overweight the importance of a university's prestige in that process; and degrade for students the educational value of the college search process.
[2] Twelve college and university presidents originally signed the letter in early May.
[2] A debate concerning the decision of the Annapolis Group to offer an alternative set of data as part of the movement challenging commercial college rankings was published as a podcast in the June 25, 2007, issue of Inside Higher Ed.
The debate was moderated by Inside Higher Ed reporter Scott Jaschik.